Pfft, no way you can make art using something free. Is this dude high?
5 Likes
Jeah that title is so stupid.
1 Like
Well, it’s not uncommon for people to think they have to buy commercial software to do high quality art. I thought the video did a good job showing some of Blender’s strengths and weaknesses is all.
7 Likes
Can this be done just for Blender, so that I can still use caps-lock for Word? As far as I can tell you can’t reguIarly assign caps-lock in Blender. I am on windows and my keyboard software has macro keys, I thus prefer not to use any conflicting software on top of it (e.g. Autohotkey).
I presume all those things are not available in the “public” build yet, right? 
The commit was pushed on July 7th.
https://developer.blender.org/rB820d0867199f352b6207d9adb68c0864760df631
After that, there was one week of completion and fixes.
So, public builds for MacOS or Linux (dated of the 23th) are containing all last recent changes made to the branch.
Windows build (dated of the 11th) should not have Fill Holes, Orientation Lock options or support scale, symmetry and rotation. And a crash fix is missing. So, yes, for windows users, it should not be as usable.
1 Like
To those who’d like to see a Blender build being up to date, here are instructions to generate your own updated custom build.
If anyone has generated a new build, please let us know here, so we can download it too, thanks.
1 Like
I remap it in Window’s registry, so it’s in all software. I find Caps Lock to be irritating, so it’s the best way for me! If you want it only in Blender then autohotkey sounds like the way to go, although… you mention macro keys so you probably don’t need it?
Hmmm, that “buildbot” site looks kinda different now… can’t find the stuff from your instructions…
Did they nuked the entire thing? 
Yeah, I see what you mean. I suspect the Blender staff / developers changed it because they didn’t like generation of custom builds being accessible to Blender users.
Then Windows users will need to wait until one of the Blender guys generates a new build. 
1 Like
Ah Danny Mac, I remember his work from the Zbrush world. Pixologic won’t be too happy to see him switch if he does.
1 Like
Danny has been using Blender for quite some time already. I reviewed his Eye Designer add-on more than a year ago.
I agree with his conclusions: most ZBrush brushes ─ especially the smoothing algorithms ─ still feel better than those in Blender Sculpt Mode, but the convenience of being able to do everything from A to Z in Blender wins, including the possibility to have multiple camera views on screen while you work, to name just one example.
There are also Blender Sculpt Mode brushes that are better than ZBrush equivalents. I love Sculpt Mode’s Kelvinlets-based brushes such as Elastic Deform and the Elastic mode of Snake Hook. And I adore the Pose brush.
I also think polygon modeling in ZBrush sucks a bit. ZModeler is an interesting approach, but poly modeling in Blender is easier and more powerful in combination with modifiers.
To name another example, instancing of an object in ZBrush is cumbersome: you need to use a macro that initiates Nanomesh on a plane, then you need to position the plane, sometimes flip edges for the right orientation, it feels like a forced workaround when compared to Blender’s linked duplicates.
And one of my biggest complaints about ZBrush is the lack of a solid GI renderer. You need to keep buying Keyshot upgrades for that, and the scene update connection between ZBrush and Keyshot breaks when you quit either ZBrush or Keyshot.
So there you have it: I’m not an unconditional ZBrush fanboy, but I’m not an unconditional Blender fanboy either. I just keep evaluating the tools that are available, and making deliberate decisions based on their progress. For example, MagicaCSG might become a really useful sculpting tool within a few updates.
9 Likes
I don’t use all this sculpting stuff, so looking from the outside I 100% agree with this:
https://twitter.com/eric_majka/status/1415758159554039811?s=11
6 Likes
Thats because they dont want to complicate the modifier before porting it to geometry nodes which should do that with ease.
1 Like
That’s not a solution. It still means you need to build radial array GN network, and then clumsily append the network from some other .blend file before you want to use it.
The lack of Radial mode in the Array modifier has been quite an embarrassment for Blender for quite a few years already.
9 Likes
I also think a simple radial option in the Array modifier is long overdue, but modifiers are not Pablo’s development area, with the exception of the Voxel mode in the Remesh modifier, which could use an update as well, making it more like the old version with smoothing algorithms and Boolean operands.
8 Likes
Thats why there is an asset browser where you can append different geometry node setups. Might even be a preset because so many people want it…
Anyways i didn’t say you were wrong, i just told you what the devs respond was…
3 Likes
I don’t think they’re going to remove the modifiers though.
That would make things more complicated and the learning curve a bit steeper for casual users, not everyone is a nodes geek/pro.
And so far I couldn’t visualize how the regular(destructive) modeling is going to work with GeoNodes like the modifiers unless they hide the complexity and make it user friendly. Or maybe it’s too early to make such comparison.
They wont remove it anytime soon but geonode will be an addition and the development of modifier will stop… At some point maybe replaced by geonodes modifers.
Anyway i am pretty sure they can find a good way to connect them.